Hounddog

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0415856/

This is a movie about a troubled girl(Dakota Fanning, 12) in the southern states who endures abuse as she grows up, and finds solace for her turbulant life in Elvis's music. (this is of course a very rough plot overview)
Very noteworthy for me about this movie is the fact that it has explicit scenes where Dakota's character is raped, naked, or just in underpants.

I find it utterly abhorrent that they feel it necessary to make a movie with such depictions. They can get away with hinting at these sorts of things, but instead the movie-makers decide to introduce this 12-year-old girl to rape and abuse, and have her act them out. It would be foolish to think that experience would have no effect on her.

Now, according to Daily Mail, there appears to be 2 taboos in Hollywood: underage sex, and killing animals, which this movie has both of. It seems to me that this movie is being produced almost for the explicit purpose of attacking both of these unofficial prohibitions(animals get killed too I guess). That may be fine in concept; however it seems that their methods of achieving this will more than likely harm the poor girl who is being used.

Just a little bit more infuriating is Dakota Fanning's mother and agent who are enthusiastic over this movie because they see it "as a possible Oscar vehicle for the pint-size star." Are they fucking retarded? Or am I just overreacting?

Child nudity and simulated child rape. Am I the only one who thinks someone is pushing the laws on child porn, or at least trying to conventionalize it just a little bit more?(I'll probably get my head bitten off for that one)
Any other thoughts on this movie?

Credit goes to clone-army.org for directing my attention to this unpalatable piece of cinema

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by el jacko

suddenly make child porn okay

Has anything ever suddenly changed societal attitudes? Of course not. And I never suggested such a thing.

A journey is comprised of many steps, and a few steps in the wrong direction kept unchecked can potentially lead to unintended (and undesired) destinations.

And no, I haven't seen Taxi Driver. But I don't think I want to.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by el jacko

You didn't suggest it, that's true, and I didn't mean to imply that you did. I actually agree with you that one movie (generally) won't change societal attitudes, but I don't think this film will even attempt to suggest that child porn is okay, and instead support the case for "child porn is bad", if in a rather graphic manner.

I hope you are right.
There just seems to me to be a nagging, albeit hopefully false, concern that people will use this as a justification to attempt to push the envelope further. The moral content of a movie can be completely ignored if the visual content will serve the purpose of someone with such an intent. I think it would be folly to say people would never try that.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.